Stephen Joseph

I do not like this precendent either. You could not appeal state court decisions to the federal court before this case. She's not feeling anything, so it doesn't really matter. I would agree with your concern if there was any thinking or conscienceness left in her.

Complete and utter trash. Globalization has its evils, but so does most everything else. Economically speaking, globalization has led to massive increases in the standards of living across the globe and will continue to do so in the future.

Mike, you've completely destroyed your argument. You went way too far out on the limb to be able to pull it back. Like you said, you would not argue with a federal court's opinion on the matter. As it stands today, a federal judge and a federal appeals court BOTH have dismissed the case. It is now being appealed to the Supreme Court. Hasn't this gone on long enough. I mean, how many times do the parents have to lose to get the message that they've exhausted their legal options?

I don't know about you, but *I'D* personally would like to see a mass stabbing ratehr than a mass shooting. Have some balls, you fuckin dysfunctional juveniles. Chris Rock "Any n*gga can shoot somebody, but it takes a man to stick him with one of these, genuine Navy Seal Combit Knifes." "Knives for guns! No innocent bystanders!" Yeah, that was insensitive. So sue me

Well, you know its not going to end there. This will still be going on after she dies.

Well, a federal judge did rule on it. So now what, an appeal to ao federal appeals court?

Yeah, and they're for limited government. And Democrats are for the little guy. And the Green Party is ... well, they're the Green Party... Republicans are for little government?

The GOP actually pushes what they like to refer to as an agenda of life. And, just to keep this clear, this is a judicial case, not state's rights --- as the state of FL has tried to save her. Judges have shot the law down. -=Mike How do you save someone who has a big glob of goop in their head and no brain? I finally figured out how I feel about this case. Look, at some point when figuring out these things you've got to look at the likelihood of recovery and the costs involved. How much do we throw down a black hole to keep someone alive? And, it isn't the state of Florida, but the Florida executive and legislative branch with the Florida judicial branch denying the case/appeal in the end. Did we really need a federal law? It's like a runner finishing a race, only to be told that they added on a few more miles at the last moment. Ex Post Facto?

My girlfriend brought up this angle. Isn't it a little scary for the federal government to intervene in what is essentially a state issue? And I thought Repubs were states' rights ...

All I have to say is that I think it's pretty shitty how this has turned into political fodder both sides are trying to benefit from. At this point, neither side really cares about the 1 vegatative person who matters.

Both camps are correct, but Harvard's acting like a bunch of fools. I'm so glad I didn't go there, and I could have. Ha! There *ARE* genetic differences between men and women. There *ARE* genetic differences between white and black. There *ARE* genetic differences between those with red hair and those with black hair. There are genetic differences between any one person on this world and any of the other 6 billion or so people. That is the basis for predispositions. Then, environmental differences can account for the development of such people from their initial starting point. It's this whole idea of nature vs. nuture. Mr Summers point had nothing to do with genetic inferiority, in fact, it states quite the opposite. Those who read his statements as such get carried away in powerful popular rhetoric from those who don't understand the issue he was trying to get it. No matter our best efforts to bring equality to the sexes, races, children, religious, whatever category you wish to delineate yourself on, we will all never be *equal*. You see, the point in the end, that I think Mr. Summers was going for, was that you have to make sure that society allows every the opportunity to discover themselves. For those girls who are good at science, go forth. For those men good at writing, go forth. Equal opportunity, something that is not given as much as we would hope in our society. You can't force equality in nature when nature itself is not equal. As an economist, I can understand that while we all may start in different places, the true crime is to block one's attempt to go with what they do best. That is non-optimizing. Truth be told, we've perverted feminism, we've become drunk with empowerment, and enslaved to soundbytes, not research. Why? So people such as the Harvard faculty can have their 15 minutes of dogmatic superiority for ego masterbation. For shame.

FYI (aka Mike, you're wrong about what monotheism means) Monotheism (from the Greek monos "only", and theos "god") is a word coined in comparatively modern times to designate belief in the one supreme God, the Creator and Lord of the world, the eternal Spirit, All-powerful, All-wise, and All-good, the Rewarder of good and the Punisher of evil, the Source of our happiness and perfection. It is opposed to Polytheism, which is belief in more gods than one, and to Atheism, which is disbelief in any deity whatsoever. In contrast with Deism, it is the recognition of God's presence and activity in every part of creation. In contrast with Pantheism, it is belief in a God of conscious freedom, distinct from the physical world. Both Deism and Pantheism are religious philosophies rather than religions. On the other hand, Monotheism, like Polytheism, is a term applying primarily to a concrete system of religion. The grounds of reason underlying monotheism have already been set forth in the article GOD. These grounds enable the inquiring mind to recognize the existence of God as a morally certain truth. Its reasonableness acquires still greater force from the positive data associated with the revelation of Christianity. (See REVELATION.) http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10499a.htm

In the President we trust...?

I thought the same thing. "Damn, she gets off on being beaten up."

That's a laugh. When was the last time GW was in the NCAA? Tech's experience last year makes them easily the favorite, as if having Sch. back already didn't help them enough.

I freaking HATE Duke. Sting e'm boys.

You're entirely right that they should be a 6 or 7. That's why its a shame (since they started ranked 3rd. That's what injuries did to the team. Right now, NC State leads Duke, because Duke isn't penetrating.

Oops... Maybe the third times the charm? Yeah. Ga Tech is definitely better than I thought. But they're still making a Sweet 16 or Elite 8 exit. There are too many teams better than them that can make it to the Final Four. And yes I think UNC is still better than them. Well I think most people think that. UNC has been the better team this year. It's nice to see Tech peaking at just the right moment. If they get both Elder and Luuuuke streaking at the same time, it'll be deadly. It's a shame they'll still be a 6 or 7 seed, but you really don't want to play them. I think this was the 7th game the whole team has been together (i.e. not injured). We'll see what happens when they play NC State tomorrow.

Oops... Maybe the third times the charm?

^^^ bingo

Having grown up in Los Angeles and currently living in Miami, I LOL at this. Quite possibly even to ROFLMAO levels. You have no idea...Only atlanta can block 10 lanes of traffic in one direction. It's a nightmare at times.

Most everyone on ESPN seems to say that was a good game for Tech, because they started to look like they're gelling again. Tech doesn't (unless Luuuuuke gets in the groove) have it to go all the way, but they're on 7 or 8 seed that's going to be exceptionally dangerous. You seem to have something against GT.

Oops. Guess not. Looks like my alma mater is off the bubble

Yes, sadly, there isn't an up arrow. Ryan posted well, and I saw his point clearly stated with alot of backup. Yours I do not, because what points I make ding off your intellectual armor. Hence, I'm done. No sense arguing with a brick wall. Toodles.

Looks up at the last post <---That, RobotJerk, is how you form an argument and make a post. To respond to you. To me, you're simply confusing emotional reason with logical reason. Logically, the FF did not forbid the death penalty nor anything associated with the death penalty. The death penalty was legislated into existence and is not contrary to constitutional law. Nowhere did they expressedly forbid this. Over time, the SC interpreted such laws as that one must have the mental faculties of an adult to be tried with the death penalty. Legislation was brought forth to protect the insane...etc. I believe in the strictest version of the separation of powers. Therefore, I believe that the court acted beyond its boundaries, as their edict in effect legislates law, not clarifying law. I stated that I would rather this had been handled in a legislative manner. Do you think I like the death penalty? The death penalty in its current form is an absolute joke, because really, its a 20 years in a cell slow death penalty. Better off without it. And Ryan, why yes, the particular theory I ascribe to makes constitutional law archaic. That's why I find it so appealing.